Health of First Nations children living off reserve and Métis children younger than age 6.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aboriginal children have been shown to experience poorer health, compared with their non-Aboriginal counterparts. Differences in health status may be associated with family and social conditions, lifestyle or behaviour, and cultural factors. DATA AND METHODS: The current study examined the parent-/guardian-reported health of First Nations children living off reserve and Métis children younger than 6. This does not include the 43% of First Nations children who were living on reserves in 2006. Data from the 2006 Aboriginal Children's Survey were used to investigate measures of child health and assess possible associations with social determinants of health. RESULTS: Most First Nations children living off reserve and Métis children were reported to be in excellent or very good health. The most common chronic conditions reported by parents/guardians were asthma, speech and language difficulties, allergies, and lactose intolerance. Several social determinants were associated with child health, including parental education, household income, breastfeeding, and perceptions of housing conditions and health facilities in the community. INTERPRETATION: The findings suggest that social factors can be associated with parent-/guardian-rated health of First Nations children living off reserve and Métis children under age 6.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".